Still More Questions Than Answers With McJunkin Building Zoning Change

A reader writes in with their account of a phone call to the attorney representing the zoning change in the McJunkin Building:

"I called the law offices of Mr. Brendan Shiller to inquire about the notice to rezone the McJunkin building from a B1 to B3 category. In the notice posted, the letter signed by Mr. Shiller specifically state that the "applicant intends to use the subject property for commercial housing." I asked what this meant, and he was unaware of the "commercial housing" aspect of the application. I told him that the letter was signed by him and that he should be aware of the contents of the letter. He paused, and then said that they were "lazy" and somebody from the office had written the letter. I was shocked to hear this revelation. He then proceeded to tell me that he knew nothing about the "commercial housing" wording in the notice.

I asked then if he knew of any public meetings to discuss the change in zoning and he said "no". He told me that I would have to contact the zoning department about this. He insisted that a retail business was coming to this location.

My question is, how can an applicant not know what type of business or entity that he or she represents? How can he tell me one thing that is clearly contradictory to what the notice is saying? A reliable source informs me that once the application for rezoning goes to the zoning committee, it is a done deal. Only the Aldermen can change this position. Is this correct? We need as many people to request specificity to be clear what is being changed to accommodate the type of entity in this building. Where is the transparency of our leaders to inform the very public they serve?"